You may make any objection you like to the article, its wording or content, but please make such objections '''clear'''. Thanking you in advance ... --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 12:32, 20 July 2012 (EDT)

You may make any objection you like to the article, its wording or content, but please make such objections '''clear'''. Thanking you in advance ... --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 12:32, 20 July 2012 (EDT)

:''far left/right'' or ''left/right'' are positions on the [[political spectrum]]. They are wildly used as a first-order approximation to describe someones political proclivities - indeed, they are used here at Conservapedia: [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Leftist&diff=prev&oldid=343133 here] you can see how Aschlafly introduces the term ''far left'' into the article [[Leftist]]. [[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 13:54, 20 July 2012 (EDT)

:''far left/right'' or ''left/right'' are positions on the [[political spectrum]]. They are wildly used as a first-order approximation to describe someones political proclivities - indeed, they are used here at Conservapedia: [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Leftist&diff=prev&oldid=343133 here] you can see how Aschlafly introduces the term ''far left'' into the article [[Leftist]]. [[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 13:54, 20 July 2012 (EDT)

+

+

== May have rebelled against his parents' belief in Christianity and their opposition to violent video games. ==

+

+

Is there any evidence for that, or is that something that someone just pulled out of their rear end? [[User:MattyD|MattyD]] 12:40, 22 January 2013 (EST)

"Mass Murder"

This is a very strong term, and here, it seems to be used disturbingly broadly, so what's the exact definition? Does suicide count into the "mass"? Is somebody who kills himself and one other person a mass murderer? --Jenkins 15:21, 7 December 2007 (EST)

Well, apparently, "mass murder" now also means "wounding and intending to kill many people" since Andy reverted my edit. I won't bother to make additional edits to this. Already got a warning block for this (among other things, like the high crime of cleaning up Conservative's mess), so whatever. --Jenkins 16:55, 7 December 2007 (EST)

Yes, the title is awkward, but we know what it means. I'm open to suggestions and can "move" the article to a new title if a better one can be found. --Ed PoorTalk 17:00, 7 December 2007 (EST)

"but we know what it means" - Ed, I'm glad that you (or Andy) weren't around when Britannica or other encyclopedias were looking for editors. Since this article is in the mainspace and thus a part of an encyclopedia (and since there is no article text giving this table any context), the headline has to be correct and not some wishy-washy "Yeah, I know it's wrong, but it sounds great!" placeholder.

I would vote for a move to Andy's userspace since the entire point of this article table is to give Andy a more convenient way of mocking liberals ("Liberal response: Poem comparing it to environmental harm" - Gosh, other people call that "victims trying to deal with a tragedy", but hey, whatever works to make a cheap point!) and casting tragedies into a light that makes me doubt that the table is supposed to be more than satire ("Belief: wore black entirely", "Belief: targeted Christmas shoppers" - I feel like I'm reading The Onion.).

To be honest, I don't see much encyclopedic value in this table. Especially not in its current form with the columns and "beliefs" mentioned above. If we cut out the "Liberal response" column, clean up the last column, find all sorts of sources, and write an entire article around the table, then we could move it to "List of school shootings" or something (which in turn might be a candidate for a category instead of a dedicated article).

But that is somewhat like trying to rebuild a car when you just start with one damaged wheel: Sure, you could repair the wheel and then build a car around it, but why not just build a car in a more logical order (starting with a motor or chassis)?

Maybe move the table to some workbench outside the mainspace and see if people are dedicated enough to tinker with it. --Jenkins 17:35, 7 December 2007 (EST)

Jenkins, I didn't read through all of your long-winded comments above. But as I said on your talk page, a Wiki is for adding and/or improving information, not deleting it. If you can improve, then do so, but don't delete information and serve the role of a censor. Go to Wikipedia to do that, where censors delete conservative information daily.--Aschlafly 17:43, 7 December 2007 (EST)

Andy, why do you even reply when you didn't read my post? Words fail me. Not even going to bother replying to your completely messed-up idea of improving the wiki ("You must not remove information added by me, no matter how little it has to do with the title"). Oh, and thanks for blocking me for cleaning up the mess caused by one of your High Quality Editors and accusing me of censorship. That sure motivates me! --Jenkins 17:57, 7 December 2007 (EST)

"wore black entirely,"

ROUND UP THE NUNS!!!! I THINK SISTER MARY ELLEN IS PACKING HEAT!!!!!!

What about ninjas? They wear all black, and we know they're bad. Black = evil.

Does this make pirates the agents of the almighty? They ARE the Ninja's sworn enemy, after all...

and Italian widows.

equating black with evil makes nuns and ministers evil ? thats not correct. Does lead one to wonder why black was selected especially as Nuns are the brides of christ , maybe white is a real challange laundry wise. Markr 13:50, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Young mass murderers

What is the criteria? Under 30? Under 25? And does a shooting in December qualify the murderer as anti-Christian? Maestro 09:17, 8 December 2007 (EST)

Hey, does one poem someone wrote on a blog really count as a response for all liberals? Or just one person? Maestro 16:59, 8 December 2007 (EST)

That was the official Virginia Tech poem. It's probably somewhere on the Virginia Tech now, as it was after the tragedy.--Aschlafly 17:03, 8 December 2007 (EST)

What is the cutoff for "young"? It's the same definition as for anything else. Still in school, or out of school and less than, say, 21.--Aschlafly 17:03, 8 December 2007 (EST)

So then the VA Tech guy doesn't count then? He was 23. Maestro 18:44, 8 December 2007 (EST)

By your "logic", Constance Clark would have been a "young mass murderer" if she had gone on a killing spree during her last university year (at age 50). It somehow appears as if you're deliberately setting the goalposts to include all students while still pretending to only focus on young ones.

Do I regard a 23 old man as "young"? Not really. He's old enough to drink, drive and vote (just not in that order, please...), so calling him "young" is misleading. --Jenkins 19:54, 8 December 2007 (EST)

A Growing Problem?

Andy, you said on the Main Talk Page that, "...this problem is growing: there were 4 mass murders...in 2007. How many will there be in 2008?" I'm afraid that's not accurate--there's been a fairly steady number of such incidents for at least a decade. Googling "school shootings" will bring up various timelines going back years with much fodder for this article. --RossC 14:23, 9 December 2007 (EST)

It's certainly been growing since the mid 90s, though. There was a wave of school shootings in 1997-1999, and copycat incidents have happened since. I just wrote a paper for my college class using statistics from 1995, and the writers then were arguing that school violence was relatively rare. And it certainly wasn't as much of a threat in the 1970s. It's growing, even though there may be variance year to year. DanH 14:24, 9 December 2007 (EST)

Yes, absolutely. I wonder, too, how much of the sense of a "growing" problem is a function of the greater availability of news via the Internet, which started hitting its stride in the mid-90s. A lot of the "lesser" pre-Net incidents might be buried out of public attention in local papers.--RossC 14:57, 9 December 2007 (EST)

No, I think it is a growing problem. I've heard the claims that it was constant or even declining from the 1970s (Vietnam Era) through Columbine (1999), but I think that's outdated now. 4+ big incidents in one year (2007), totaling 50 dead and many injured, plus numerous arrests including some yesterday for foiled attempts, is more than any time in 30 years, I think.--Aschlafly 15:12, 9 December 2007 (EST)

Colorado killer

The Colorado killer does not meet the previous definition of young: "Still in school, or out of school and less than, say, 21." Besides, he was a Christian-hater too.--Aschlafly 21:16, 10 December 2007 (EST)

A "very, very religious" Christian who hates Christians? That's a new one on me. The young man was clearly troubled, but I don't think you've shown that he hated Christians specifically, so much as he bore a grudge against the Missionary program from which he was ejected. SSchultz 21:43, 10 December 2007 (EST)

The point was that he was homeschooled. When a Public Schooler goes on a mass killing spree its solely because he went to a public school. When a homeschooler goes on a killing spree its most certainly not because of his flawless education and values. MarcusCicero 21:50, 10 December 2007 (EST) P.S- Just above, you also say the V Tech killer meets the definition of young. At least attempt to find logical consistency.

VT

Saying that the VT poem merely compared the tragedy to environmental harm is disingenuous as it is a gross understatement - more should be added to that. Regardless however, the poem had no political motivations - it was logic - unless someone here thinks that elephants DESERVE to be massacred for ivory. "Damn those darn elephants -they cheat in a poker games"--IDuan 22:03, 10 December 2007 (EST)

Asa Coon

Why is Asa Coon on here? Since when is suicide mass murder?--IDuan 09:59, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Attempted murder ... 4 times, followed by killing himself, which is also a type of murder.--Aschlafly 10:06, 16 February 2008 (EST)

I'm not a communist or anything but I really don't understand how you can class a suicide as mass murder. Surely if this is the case the list would be somewhat longer than eight entries. RedDog 13:32, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Ummm...Mr. Schlafly?

Aschlafly reverted my edit about the latest one concerning public schools, and....may I ask why? It seemed a logical followup to what was said. --JMarks 23:01, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Marc Lépine

As I stated clearly, Marc had been in the workforce and was not a "young mass murderer." Also, the description for his views is misleading because it lacks hsi religious background. See, e.g., Volokh Blog.--Aschlafly 11:17, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

He was also still in school and is younger than another entry on this list. His views were that he hated feminism. How is this misleading? If you don't believe me, read his suicide note.--DamianSuarez 11:38, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Forgive the mistakes, I had 15 minutes to write this. See also Annex.

Would you note that if I commit suicide today 89-12-06 it is not for economic reasons (for I have waited until I exhausted all my financial means, even refusing jobs) but for political reasons. Because I have decided to send the feminists, who have always ruined my life, to their Maker. For seven years life has brought me no joy and being totally blasé, I have decided to put an end to those viragos.

I tried in my youth to enter the Forces as an officer cadet, which would have allowed me possibly to get into the arsenal and precede Lortie in a raid. They refused me because antisocial (sic). I therefore had to wait until this day to execute my plans. In between, I continued my studies in a haphazard way for they never really interested me, knowing in advance my fate. Which did not prevent me from obtaining very good marks despite my theory of not handing in work and the lack of studying before exams.

Even if the Mad Killer epithet will be attributed to me by the media, I consider myself a rational erudite that only the arrival of the Grim Reaper has forced to take extreme acts. For why persevere to exist if it is only to please the government. Being rather backward-looking by nature (except for science), the feminists have always enraged me. They want to keep the advantages of women (e.g. cheaper insurance, extended maternity leave preceded by a preventative leave, etc.) while seizing for themselves those of men.

Thus it is an obvious truth that if the Olympic Games removed the Men-Women distinction, there would be Women only in the graceful events. So the feminists are not fighting to remove that barrier. They are so opportunistic they neglect to profit from the knowledge accumulated by men through the ages. They always try to misrepresent them every time they can. Thus, the other day, I heard they were honoring the Canadian men and women who fought at the frontline during the world wars. How can you explain then that women were not authorized to go to the frontline??? Will we hear of Caesar's female legions and female galley slaves who of course took up 50% of the ranks of history, though they never existed. A real Casus Belli.

Sorry for this too brief letter.

Marc Lépine

A list of names follows, with this note attached:--DamianSuarez 11:38, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Nearly died today. The lack of time (because I started too late) has allowed these radical feminists to survive.
Alea Jacta Est.

Rename?

It seems to me this article needs to be renamed, without the "mass" in the title. Someone who murders one person (Kimveer Gill) or just himself (Asa Coon) can't really be said to be a "mass murderer" by any sense of the definition. Maybe "Attempted mass murderers" or just "murderers", or some other adjective, for accuracy's sake. Fyezall 12:05, 26 August 2008 (EDT)

perhaps just remove the few who didnt kill more than 1 ?

Teach Marksmanship !

My initial response to this article is probably going to seem bizarre but the death count and number wounded leads me to a professional condemnation of their marksmanship. If the intention was to kill rather than just create confusion then more injured than dead is inexcusable Markr 13:46, 21 November 2008 (EST)

I find that comment incredibly distasteful (not that i lost any friends in these attacks) but never the less, spare a thought for the parents and friends of the victims - would they like to hear that comment? (just my opinion - nothing personal) ---- PhilipV I Support our Troops! 22:58, 31 December 2008 (EST)

Tim Kretschmer was "indicative of anti-Christianity"?

In the article it is said that Tim Kretschmer was "indicative of anti-Christianity". I haven't found any evidence for that proposition. I also asked for a reference but my edit was reverted. I guess that he was kind of atheist, but some reference would be appreciated. I have been actively looking for it but I haven't found. So to someone who doesn't have such a presupposition, it can be quite hard to believe without a reference. So if someone has a reference, please add it. --Erkkimon 18:21, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

"I haven't found any evidence for that proposition" may mean you haven't yet opened your mind to it. Atheists censor disclosure of the harm they cause, but that doesn't prevent the use of logic.--Andy Schlafly 20:22, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

You're trying to say that I haven't opened my mind to a proposition that atheists are behind these mass murders? I'm not sure if I understood right. But if I did understand right, I want to tell you that I'm quite sure that Kretschmer is also an atheist, because I have analyzed the school mass murders in Finland quite deeply. This article is mainly written by me and it should prove that I have opened my mind to the idea of mass murdering atheists. But you have to understand that we can't just guess. It doesn't prove anything. So I'll ask again. Is there any proof, that is not just a claim, that Tim Kretschmer was an atheist or naturalist or anti-semitist or anti-christian? --Erkkimon 20:48, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

Wearing all black as a teenager is suggestive of anti-Christian beliefs. Other examples in this entry illustrate that. I welcome more evidence, but am not going to play dumb amid liberal denial by others.

Your entry that you link above takes a small step towards the truth, yet ignores how deadly anti-Christian animus is, and how many self-described atheists suffer from it. It's not a mental illness, but a belief system that results from being misled.--Andy Schlafly 14:42, 15 March 2009 (EDT)

Suggested addition

"Boulder Undersheriff Tom Shoemaker said, "The suspect ... fired a shot into the ceiling and yelled something about religion to the employees.”

"He (the suspect) barged in and wanted to know who was a Christian and who wasn't a Christian," said Sheriff Joe Pelle." CCalloway 14:14, 15 March 2009 (EDT)

That's not even close to the level of the examples here.--Andy Schlafly 14:34, 15 March 2009 (EDT)

He killed himself, a Catholic man, and a cat. That puts him above Asa Coon's kill count, and, depending on how you count the cat, above or equal to Kimveer Gill's kill count. CCalloway 14:59, 15 March 2009 (EDT)

We don't count cats as humans, and you're ignoring the huge disparity in numbers wounded. Also, a working 24-year-old who is no longer a student is not considered "young".--Andy Schlafly 15:01, 15 March 2009 (EDT)

I didn't suggest you counted cats as humans. Asa Coon wounded four, Bonestroo wounded a deputy and killed a Catholic man. That's not that far out of scale. You've got one example of similar age on the page, and one that is three years older. Why are you so opposed to this entry? CCalloway 15:07, 15 March 2009 (EDT)

Andy, just let him add that entry. He is factually correct, and your points contradict the rest of the article.

The suggested addition is not even close to the level of the current examples.--Andy Schlafly 07:54, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

Possibly Unnecessary Column?

Do we need a column with the liberal response? While I am all for outing the liberals for their ignorance and hypocrisy, it seems a bit extraneous alongside this particular article. I must say, though, this article is extremely well done! I especially like the "beliefs" column. Where else can I find that? Not anywhere in the mainstream media! It's good to see that we care about the truth. Krazor 13:33, 4 December 2009 (EST)

Thanks for pointing out the uniqueness of this entry. But the extra column about "liberal response" is also informative, is it not? It's an eye-opener as well.--Andy Schlafly 17:59, 4 December 2009 (EST)

I must say, it truly is. Thank you for taking the time to respond, Mr. Schlafly! May God give you peace! Krazor 20:46, 6 December 2009 (EST)

Asa Coon and Kimveer Gill

Most criminologists refer to mass murder as "the killing of four or more people in a single event" despite the fact that mass murder was their goal, they do not, in fact meet that criteria. I would suggest making a a seperate page on school shootings. Anyway, in the meanwhile, I am going to remove them from this list as they don't meet the criteria.--WilliamMc 10:22, 18 December 2009 (EST)

Page move

I suggest moving the page to "Mass murderers". Nothing about the age of the murderer has anything to do with their motivations. What matters is the environment that led to these terrible acts. By making "young" a requirement, we're either going to be misleading (like potentially inferring that Amy Bishops was a young woman) or incomplete (by omitting mass murderers like Amy Bishops because she wasn't young). Let's keep Conservapedia both accurate and complete and move the page. Thanks, JeffT 09:44, 16 February 2010 (EST)

Perhaps it would be best to merge with Mass murder? JeffT 09:47, 16 February 2010 (EST)

No, the age is relevant, and it was their beliefs that DID matter very much. And where did they get those beliefs at their young age? You'll see that many in school and on the internet propagate such disastrous belief systems. For every one who goes on a murderous rampage, there are hundreds or thousands who suffer mentally and emotionally to lesser extents ... due to their belief system.--Andy Schlafly 10:15, 16 February 2010 (EST)

Please, Mr. Schlafly, reconsider my request. Mistakenly implying that Bishop was young is misleading. Intentionally doing so is deceitful. You have stated that the criteria for young is nowhere near Bishop's 54 years of age. I know you will open your mind and make the right choice to improve the accuracy of Conservapedia. How about "publicly schooled mass murderers"? Thank you, JeffT 10:21, 16 February 2010 (EST)

Amy Bishop began killing at what, age 19? If you like, you can add a footnote explaining that her rampage continued until age 54.

More generally, your objection is nit-picky to the point of the absurd. Diluting the entire entry is not the way to handle one caveat. Please open your mind for the important information conveyed by the entry: what kids are taught, and what they believe, does matter.--Andy Schlafly 11:07, 16 February 2010 (EST)

A wise man once said, "I don't want to perpetuate this debate, but I don't want a lack of response to be misinterpreted". Bishop was not 19 when she killed her brother. Bishop has not been convicted of murder for the killing of her brother and you know that you don't know if it was in fact murder. You have seemingly ignored yet endorsed my point that what people are taught is what matters, which is why the article would undoubtedly be more accurate if it were "publicly schooled mass murderers". Can you deny this? You can name call it nitpicking, I call it what it is: factual accuracy. JeffT 11:19, 16 February 2010 (EST)

Jeff, are you debating this matter, in a liberal vs. conservative way, or are you trying to improve the article? If it's the latter, please stick to the point and avoid personal remarks such as, "Intentionally doing so is deceitful." First, last, and only warning. --Ed PoorTalk 12:03, 16 February 2010 (EST)

Good point, Ed. Jeff, how old was Bishop when she killed her brother? You say that "Bishop was not 19 when she killed her brother." Then you seem to deny that she killed him at all, which would be false. Moreover, your suggested title of "public schooled mass murderers" would not be as precise for all the entries as "young mass murderers." Simply put, your suggestion introduces more inaccuracies then it would allegedly repair.--Andy Schlafly 12:20, 16 February 2010 (EST)

Mr. Schlafly, you are mistaken. I did not deny that Bishop killed her brother. Please focus on these three simple questions: Do you deny that you are in no position to rule the killing of Seth Bishop a murder? Do you deny that Bishop is not a young woman? Do you deny that public schooling was more important than age in these murders? Thanks, JeffT 12:58, 16 February 2010 (EST)

Jeff, please first answer my simple question (and correct your misstatements, if necessary). Was Bishop 19 when she killed her brother, or what age was she? You expressly claimed she was not 19.--Andy Schlafly 13:16, 16 February 2010 (EST)

I am glad to answer your question. According to bio she was born 4/24/65. The killing occurred on 12/6/86 according to various sources. That would make her over 21. I await your answers to my questions. Thanks, JeffT 13:36, 16 February 2010 (EST)

I wonder why you emphasized that Bishop was not 19 when she killed her brother, if she was merely slightly older. In response to your questions, "Do you deny that you are in no position to rule the killing of Seth Bishop a murder?" I would not, and did not, attempt to "rule" on anything. But Bishop's killing of her brother (and her conduct immediately afterward) is highly suggestive of murder. Do you deny that? Second question, "Do you deny that Bishop is not a young woman?" Bishop first killed when she was a young woman, and then while still in her 20s was a suspect in the attempted murder of a professor who was critical of her. No, she's not particularly young now. Third question, "Do you deny that public schooling was more important than age in these murders?" Public schooling is a big part of the problem. But this entry focuses on a particular type of murder, and the common thread is more than the fact that most or all went to public school.--Andy Schlafly 15:15, 16 February 2010 (EST)

This entry focuses on a particular type of murder, and the common thread is more than the fact that most or all were young. I wish we could agree on that and follow my original suggestion of moving the article to "mass murderers". JeffT 15:21, 16 February 2010 (EST)

No, because we don't include the many people who become mass murderers at an older age, such as Charles Manson.

You protest too much. Your real objection seems to be with the numerous examples, but the facts speak for themselves and we're here to tell the facts. Wikipedia is better for those who want to conceal or deny facts.--Andy Schlafly 16:07, 16 February 2010 (EST)

I have verified that every person on this list went to public school. Your claim that the change to "publicly schooled mass murderers" would cause more problems than it solved was a falsehood, as there is not even an exception, unlike the nebulous criterion of youth. Ironically, Manson also went to public school and committed mass murder in his thirties (unlike Bishop who was in her fifties). I'm here to set facts straight and you cannot deny that Amy Bishop did not commit mass murder as a young woman without loosing all credibility. I sense your patience is wearing thin, so i shall try to improve other articles. JeffT 16:22, 16 February 2010 (EST)

Jeff, if you feel there is evidence that young mass murderers in the US have been influenced by public schools, why not add that to the article? We can decide later on a page move, which is just an administrative function. Editorial integrity comes first, don't you think? --Ed PoorTalk 16:41, 16 February 2010 (EST)

I completely agree, Ed. Unfortunately, after making changes after Andy and I agreed that we could not rule Seth Bishop's killing a murder and that the article was about a particular type of murder (not killing), the article was locked. JeffT 16:47, 16 February 2010 (EST)

Try taking a more cooperative or humble tone, and you'll find other writers more comfortable with your suggestions. Also, your claim, "Bishop was not 19 when she killed her brother," is contradicted by the 2nd of the two articles I just now googled up.

Before Bishop, who was 19 at the time, could be booked the police chief back then called officers and told them to release her to her mother ... [2]

Who was it who said that we are entitled to our opinions, but not to our own set of facts? --Ed PoorTalk 13:52, 17 February 2010 (EST)

Serial killer vs. mass murder

The Encyclopaedia Britannica defines serial killing as the the unlawful homicide of at least two people, carried out in a series over a period of time. Although this definition was established in the United States, it has been largely accepted in Europe and elsewhere, but the crime is not formally recognized in any legal code, including that of the United States. Serial murder is distinguished from mass murder, in which several victims are murdered at the same time and place.

On Conservapedia, we read that Mass murder is the killing of large numbers of people. (The examples given in the article are all of genocide, perhaps an example of a terrorist attack should be added).

A serial killer is - according to Conservapedia a murderer who is responsible for multiple killings carried out on separate occasions.

On this very talk page, Aschlafly defines young: What is the cutoff for "young"? It's the same definition as for anything else. Still in school, or out of school and less than, say, 21.--Aschlafly 17:03, 8 December 2007 (EST)

The facts:

When Amy Bishop killed her brother, she was no older than 21.

When she killed he colleagues, she was 45 - and so, she wasn't young any longer (unless you claim that she is still in school)

Two questions:
Jeffrey Dahmer was 18 when he killed his first victim. Does this make him a young mass murderer?
Amy Bishop may have been a murderer age 19. But she became a mass murderer age 45. Adolf Hitler was 43 when he came to power in Germany. Is he a young mass murderer, too?

That said, I think that A. Bishop is a mass murderer and a serial killer. She just isn't a young mass murderer. Generally, it doesn't make sense to speak about a young serial killer - at least not if his murders happened over an extended period of time.

Couple things. First, in my opinion, this article should have a title reflective of the fact that these individuals had a personal ideology which was against God or against American values in some degree. It should contain just those people regardless of age.

Second, you have to put mass murderers in a proper context no matter who they are. Amy Bishop was not a "serial killer"; prior to the UAH incident she is on record of killing one person, and it has been dismissed as an accident; we have to list it as an accident until proven otherwise. John List killed off his entire family in 1971; he was pro-God and a devout Lutheran. This keeps him out of this article but it still makes him every bit a mass murderer as the others. The same with Charles Whitman, who killed 14 at the University of Texas in Austin; a brain tumor was found to have played a role in his case.

Third, we have to know the differences between a mass murderer, a serial killer, and a spree killer. A mass murderer kills multiple people at one location and at one time (James Huberty, Richard Speck, Columbine killers, etc). A serial killer kills total strangers at differing locations, at different times, with a "cooling-off" period between murders, and usually with a personal gratification (John Gacy, Ted Bundy, Richard Ramirez). A spree killer kills people at random in a disorganized manner during a short period of time (Andrew Cunanan, Beltway sniper, Virgina Tech killer). Karajou 14:28, 18 February 2010 (EST)

But at the moment, the article is titled young mass murderers. For me, it seems to be more of an essay, as it has a clear intention, namely to show

young mass murderers are liberals.

Due to the somewhat arcane selection of examples as to be seen on this talk page, it only makes the point

liberal mass murderers are liberals.

There are a couple of ways to solve this:

keep the title and include all young mass murderers. In this case, at least the name of Amy Bishop has to be dropped

change the title according to Karajou's proposal to something like liberal mass murderers.In this case, the question will arise whether there should be an article on unliberal mass murderers.

follow JeffT's wishes and move the article to public schooled mass murderers. As there are comparatively few home schoolers, this seems not to be a such a good option - it's like writing an article on Chinese murderers in Bejing

name the article mass murderers, make a short introduction that it isn't about genocide and terrorist attacks - and include all examples, even those mentioned by Karajou. Perhaps the entries could be color-coded according to their belief system?

Ages

PhilG, you can put the ages in a footnote for each, but it's too much trivia to obscure the text with. If you want to suggest counterexamples who fit the criteria of the entry, feel free to do so here. I doubt you'll find many.--Andy Schlafly 12:58, 19 February 2010 (EST)

Sorry, I saw your note about Breivik being too old for the list, but I see Amy Bishop is 46. I'm not sure what the criteria are for inclusion? TracyS 11:44, 23 July 2011 (EDT)

She allegedly committed her first murder at a much younger age.--Andy Schlafly 12:55, 23 July 2011 (EDT)

Breivik

Breivik was 32, hardly "young". Is there and age cut off or should we change the title of the page? MaxFletcher 16:41, 24 July 2011 (EDT)

Your point is excellent, but perhaps Breivik was immature for his age. I doubt we'd include anyone older on this list. To some extent, maturity matters more than age.--Andy Schlafly 18:41, 24 July 2011 (EDT)

Cleaning or censoring?

Aschlafly, immediately after you had reverted my edit at Young mass murderers, I tried to comment on this talk page. But I had to read The action you have requested is limited to users in one of the groups: Administrators, edit., and so I gave up after two hours of trying.

How can it be more important to know that Breivik was possibly influenced by the esthetics of World-of-Warcraft II than that he was certainly driven by his hate for Muslims?

I have taken the liberty of replacing the term "far-right" with "nationalistic" because it appears more appropriate for Breivic. Placing his idiotic, thuggish brand of politics anywhere on the political scale is unfair and serves only as an emotive term or perhaps a wolf whistle. It is analogous to calling the Nazi's left wing or right wing - they don't really fit anywhere on a political scale. (And have I found an exception to Godwin's Law?) --DamianJohn 02:57, 29 February 2012 (EST)

@Aschlafly: Muslims were not victims of Breivik so what? His ideology and motivations are well known (unlike his preferences for video-game aesthetics, btw), and his hatred of Muslims played a big part in his pathological weltanschauung. Amy Bishop is described as a far-left political extremist, though she didn't kill conservatives! AugustO 12:06, 29 February 2012 (EST)

Breivik, still and again

Aschlafly, you complain that the liberal media ignore his video-gaming and show him as a fundamentalist Christian. But he invested far more time into his far-right fantasies than into video-gaming. You may think of him as the exception which proves the point, but he himself stresses his far-right positions - and his hate for Muslims. Why do you want to suppress this information? AugustO 11:27, 20 July 2012 (EDT)

There's no evidence he was a Bible-thumping churchgoer, and his murderous rampage was similar to violent video game fantasies that played. There's nothing "right-wing" about it.--Andy Schlafly 11:30, 20 July 2012 (EDT)

It's unclear what the term "far-right" means in this context. Is it supposed to mean "too conservative" or "so conservative as to be harmful", or does it just mean totalitarian like Hitler and other fascists? Before you answer, bear in mind that leftists divide lump all their enemies together, so even people who believe in individual freedom are called "fascist" (meaning anti-freedom).

You may make any objection you like to the article, its wording or content, but please make such objections clear. Thanking you in advance ... --Ed PoorTalk 12:32, 20 July 2012 (EDT)

far left/right or left/right are positions on the political spectrum. They are wildly used as a first-order approximation to describe someones political proclivities - indeed, they are used here at Conservapedia: here you can see how Aschlafly introduces the term far left into the article Leftist. AugustO 13:54, 20 July 2012 (EDT)

May have rebelled against his parents' belief in Christianity and their opposition to violent video games.

Is there any evidence for that, or is that something that someone just pulled out of their rear end? MattyD 12:40, 22 January 2013 (EST)